Alternatives to standard notation ?

[richardjay]

After many years of avoiding public performance, due to extreme stage fright, I've realised that the main cause of anxiety was forgetting what the next chord/part was. That may sound simplistic but for many years I thought I didn't like performing in public because I didn't like being the centre of attention.

Anyway - therapy aside - now that I know what I need to "fix" does anyone have any suggestions for more informal kinds of notation other than regular notation (ie staffs, key signatures, etc.). I have tried to learn it many times but it's just not for me - too rigid and, frankly, doesn't look too great on stage either unless you're playing classical music.

I'm looking for a kind of aide memoire (why am I speaking french !?) that tells me the chords and inversions (at a minimum). My memory for chord names is not too bad. Note duration and timing is not a problem either: I seem to remember that. Also I don't need to worry about having to change the key, so systems that use I, II, IV, etc., would probably not work for me.

Of course, I could try and come up with my own shorthand but I thought I'd see what else people are using other than notation.

Failing that, I guess any kind of memory techniques might be helpful. I'm really bad at remembering what I wrote, because I use my DAW like a notepad: as soon as I write something I like I save it and rarely need to play it again. Consequently, it never gets committed to memory.

All ideas, very welcome.

[Sonare Coeli]

I don't know if these ideas will be helpful, but maybe they'll start some brainstorming at least. In high school I played in a jazz combo with some good friends (who were also really awesome musicians). I played bass and I always preferred the comfort of having a chord chart on stage. I even notated some lines that I liked (which you technically aren't supposed to do as a bassist, haha).

One thing that we used for one performance was a kind of flow chart. It had the order of the song on it (intro, main riff, chorus, etc.) in the exact flow that would happen in the song. It also combined notation and chords.

You could try something similar. I know you don't prefer notation, so how about something like a flow chart, that has the order, and then has the chord names, with the notes of the chord spelled out underneath. Then for your melody, you could have the first few notes written down with letter names to jog your memory, or even the whole thing, with spaces in between that would remind you of note values. So, maybe something like this for example:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Into:
Melody: BABC...E F# G... etc...
Chords:
G.....D/F#....Em....Bm....C....G.....D
D.........A............B........F#......G......D.. ....A
B.........F#..........G........D........E......B.. ....F#
G.........D............E........B........C......G. .....D
...........F#
Chorus: (something similar, etc...)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Would something like this work? You can even right notes to yourself telling you to wait for a cue from another player or to listen for something. You could do something simpler too, and provide piano voicings for the chords. I just put down triads because I don't play piano! Haha. Would this work for you?

[Sonare Coeli]

Please ignore all of the periods in the diagram, the forum won't let me keep the spacing, so I have to use periods to hold the space.

[Gustov Varbirski]

Don't know if you use Finale, but it has a template and a staff style for creating just words with chords above them. Another option, if there are no words, is just a standard rhythm notation, also available with Finale. It consists of a slash for each beat with the chord over the beat where it changes. It does take a little getting used to if you haven't used it before.

What works for me, on the other hand, is to have someone standing next to me, shouting in my ear, "G! D7! E minor!" :wow:

[richardjay]

Thanks a lot Sonare.

That's certainly kickstarted my brain. I guess I was looking for more of a shorthand system. For example, have you heard of the Nashville Numbers system ? (http://www.ducksdeluxe.com/nashvillenumbersystem.html)

That uses roman numerals so is not what I'm looking for - however I like some of the things they do, like for example if there is more than one chord progression in a bar they use parenthesis.

I think "notating" inversions are the biggest challenge for me, right now. I seem to recall some people use a number after the chord to represent whether a chord is in the root (1st position) or 2nd position, etc. So G1 would be the notes of G, B & D. Whereas G2 would be B, D & G. I'm just going from memory here - does this sound familiar to anyone ?

[Pingu]

I think "notating" inversions are the biggest challenge for me, right now. I seem to recall some people use a number after the chord to represent whether a chord is in the root (1st position) or 2nd position, etc. So G1 would be the notes of G, B & D. Whereas G2 would be B, D & G. I'm just going from memory here - does this sound familiar to anyone ?

I'll admit I'm not terribly knowledgable in this area - I'm strictly a 'dot reader,' and when I do do chords, it's Roman numerals in relation to the key.

But my boss is a jazzer, and I believe he uses a system where he uses one letter for the name of the chord, with a horizontal line under it. Below the horizontal line goes the bass note. This takes care of both inversions, and chords over a non-chordal bass note.

[swinkler]

Thanks a lot Sonare.

I think "notating" inversions are the biggest challenge for me, right now. I seem to recall some people use a number after the chord to represent whether a chord is in the root (1st position) or 2nd position, etc. So G1 would be the notes of G, B & D. Whereas G2 would be B, D & G. I'm just going from memory here - does this sound familiar to anyone ?

Is figured bass (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figured_bass) what you're referring to? First inversion is indicated by a 6 and second inversion is indicated by a 6 over 4. The numbers indicate the interval above the bass note (not the root of the chord but the bass note).

So a C chord (C-E-G) is of course all thirds. If you arrange it E-G-C you have a 6th between the E and C. If you arrange it G-C-E you have a sixth between the G and E and fourth between the G and C, hence the 6/4.

Hope that helps. For commercial applications I would prefer seeing C/E or C/G type of notation. I hope that helps.

Steve Winkler

[Gustov Varbirski]

Figured bass has not really been used for a couple of hundred years, outside of music theory classes. In Finale you can choose whatever chord notation you want, including the Nashville style. If you want to be able to play something in a variety of keys, the Nashville style is good. But it really requires a greater understanding of theory than just the chord letters.

What swinkler said about the bass notation is correct. I've studied theory and also I'm a bass player, and I've never heard of the G1, G2 scenario.

[richardjay]

Figured Bass is something new to me actually, though it sounds like I may have been misremembering the G1, etc, idea. Using a 6 &/or 4 doesn't immediately feel comfortable to me but it's one more idea to put into the melting pot for, what will probably become, my own method of notation.

Swinkler: when you say you'd prefer to see (for example) C/E, would you read that as a Cmaj with an E bass ? Or is it a Cmaj inverted starting at the E ?

[richardjay]

Hi Pingu,

Yes, the horizontal line between chord & bass note is both logical and simple. But I'm not clear on how I'd know what inversion of the chord to use ? For example, if I wanted to play a Cmaj as E G C and let's say I was playing a Bflat in the bass, I can't see how to write that in the way your boss would write it.

I think I'll look some more into how jazz players chart their music as there might be some good ideas there.

[swinkler]

Figured Bass is something new to me actually, though it sounds like I may have been misremembering the G1, etc, idea. Using a 6 &/or 4 doesn't immediately feel comfortable to me but it's one more idea to put into the melting pot for, what will probably become, my own method of notation.

Swinkler: when you say you'd prefer to see (for example) C/E, would you read that as a Cmaj with an E bass ? Or is it a Cmaj inverted starting at the E ?

I'm a little slow on the uptake. To me C/E means C major chord with an E in the bass, which doesn't really indicate how you as a piano/keyboard player would voice the chord. I'm slowly gathering this is what you're wanting to shorthand.

On the other hand, I suppose you could still use C/E type notation to indicate you're own voicing even if the bass player was playing a C.


But I'm not clear on how I'd know what inversion of the chord to use ? For example, if I wanted to play a Cmaj as E G C and let's say I was playing a Bflat in the bass, I can't see how to write that in the way your boss would write it.

Once you add a fourth note, the C/E type notation breaks down for how you would voice the chord. To say C/E/Bb wouldn't work at all.

Steve Winkler

[Gustov Varbirski]

I'm a little slow on the uptake. To me C/E means C major chord with an E in the bass, which doesn't really indicate how you as a piano/keyboard player would voice the chord. I'm slowly gathering this is what you're wanting to shorthand.

On the other hand, I suppose you could still use C/E type notation to indicate you're own voicing even if the bass player was playing a C.

Once you add a fourth note, the C/E type notation breaks down for how you would voice the chord. To say C/E/Bb wouldn't work at all.


You can voice the right hand anyway that you want. In 1st inversion (C/E in your example) the third of the chord (E) is often ommitted from the right hand, although it need not necessarily be. But the rule is that there can only be one bass note. You can't have one player playing C in the bass and another playing E. To that end, many of the best jazz keyboard players do not play the bass part at all, so that nothing conflicts.

The case of including the Bb would be a C7 (aka C dominant 7th.) If the 7th is in the bass (third inversion) it is most common not to include it in the right hand.

The fifth of the chord (G) can be left out, particularly in a 7th, 9th (etc.) chord, because the ear fills it in. The first and third of the chord are enough to define the quality as either major or minor. Of course, in a diminished or augmented chord, the 5th is required.

Just to clarify:
C (with C in the bass) = root position
C/E = 1st inversion
C/G = 2nd inversion
C/Bb = 3rd inversion

Hope this helps.

[Pingu]

Hi Pingu,

Yes, the horizontal line between chord & bass note is both logical and simple. But I'm not clear on how I'd know what inversion of the chord to use ?

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. To me the inversion of a chord is simply about which note is at the bottom, not the specific voicing. So E-G-C and E-C-G are both first inversion chords.

I think if I wanted to be specific about the whole voicing of a chord I would resort to standard notation, which probably does it most economically.

But I'm very conscious that I have a very narrow view on music - the whole world of charts and improvisation is very new to me. And even in the little time I've been around my boss and his friends I've discovered that all of them use terminology completely differently, so I'm probably best staying out of this one.

[richardjay]

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. To me the inversion of a chord is simply about which note is at the bottom, not the specific voicing. So E-G-C and E-C-G are both first inversion chords.

Interesting ~| Are you a guitarist by any chance ?? I couldn't even play E-C-G with one hand. So, first inversion to me would always be E-G-C ... but maybe I'm the one with a narrow view. ;)

One thing I've learnt from this is that I should only adopt a system if it immediately makes sense to me and seems natural. I take your point though that sometimes standard notation is the only way, certainly if you need to communicate with others.

[Pingu]

Interesting ~| Are you a guitarist by any chance ?? I couldn't even play E-C-G with one hand.

LOL!! If only you could have seen my attempts to learn guitar. I did try taking lessons from the guitar teacher we use at school, in exchange for teaching him piano. I never got how not to press down three strings at once - my fingers are just too fat.

On the other hand I do have extremely broad hands, so yes I can play E-C-G at the piano. But mainly my way of thinking is from analysing orchestral scores. In really stuffy harmony books, they tend to talk about inversions in terms of which note is at the bottom, no matter how the chord is voiced. Even if a chord were E, then C 3 octaves higher, and G another two octaves up. Functionally they're treated the same.

[Serge]

I once used a guitar tablature and found it very easy to follow .

SergeD

[Gustov Varbirski]

I tried using guitar tablature once as well, and found it utterly useless. It may, however, have had to do with the fact that I was trying to play the clarinet at the time.

*()

[Skysaw]

I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing. To me the inversion of a chord is simply about which note is at the bottom, not the specific voicing. So E-G-C and E-C-G are both first inversion chords.
This is correct, and has always been the only indicator of inversion. Even figured bass from the Baroque period only gave this much information (though in a slightly different form). The reason is that from a harmony standpoint, changing the bass note changes the quality and function of the chord in a way that re-voicing the upper parts does not.

Most lead sheets, fake-books, etc., all use this method as well: Root+quality+added/altered tones+bass note. When no bass note is given, it is usually assumed to be in root position.

[buckshead]

Why not consider the following combination of methods,
Start with the chord name ie C
Add the tension ie C7 (used in popular music all the time)
add a,b,c,d to indicate the inversion a= first, b = second, c = third and d= fourth (yes you can have fourth if the chord is more than a triad)
then add / bass note. ( the bass note does not even have to be in the same key) ending up with C7a/F say played as F in bass, C - E - G - Bflat or
My funny valentine starts Cma - Cma/B - Cma7/Bflat etc (How do you write a flat here, should have used a sharp key I suppose - You could also replace the m for minor with a - sign, + sign for major, o for diminished,

[Gustov Varbirski]

Why not consider the following combination of methods,
Start with the chord name ie C
Add the tension ie C7 (used in popular music all the time)
add a,b,c,d to indicate the inversion a= first, b = second, c = third and d= fourth (yes you can have fourth if the chord is more than a triad)
then add / bass note. ( the bass note does not even have to be in the same key) ending up with C7a/F say played as F in bass, C - E - G - Bflat or
My funny valentine starts Cma - Cma/B - Cma7/Bflat etc (How do you write a flat here, should have used a sharp key I suppose - You could also replace the m for minor with a - sign, + sign for major, o for diminished,

Don't mean to be overly negative here, but there are several problems with this.

1. First inversion is not root position. First inversion has the third of the chord in the bass. Root position is simply called root position. The 7th in the bass is third inversion.

2. Adding an extra designation to indicate the inversion (a, b, c, d) just complicates things needlessly. C/G clearly indicates second inversion.

3. The + sign is used to indicate an augmented chord. "o" is already used for diminished. Most people are used to seeing "m" to designate a minor chord. Again, no need to confuse the issue when there is a widely accepted standard. No indication is needed to indicate major. I know someone who insists on writing "Maj" after every major triad. I've tried to tell him this is not necessary, or even common practice. Every time I come to one of these chords, my instinct is to play a major 7th.

Again, sorry for picking your post apart like this. I mean no offense.

[Gustov Varbirski]

I hate to complicate the issue of alternate bass notes, but I saw this over on the Finale forum.

Technically, an alternate bass note, whether or not it's a chord tone is indicated by a slash (eg. C/E or C7/F).

When they are vertically aligned and separated by a horizontal line, i.e.:
A
B it indicates a polychord. That means a complete chord over another complete chord. In this example the chord would be spelled (from the bottom up) B, D#, F#, A, C#, E. Many composers insist on this distinction. I don't. I would try to find a different way to write the chord--in this case B11.

There--how's that for a different wrinkle? :wow:

[Pingu]

I hate to complicate the issue of alternate bass notes, but I saw this over on the Finale forum.

Technically, an alternate bass note, whether or not it's a chord tone is indicated by a slash (eg. C/E or C7/F).

When they are vertically aligned and separated by a horizontal line, i.e.:
A
B it indicates a polychord. That means a complete chord over another complete chord. In this example the chord would be spelled (from the bottom up) B, D#, F#, A, C#, E. Many composers insist on this distinction. I don't. I would try to find a different way to write the chord--in this case B11.

There--how's that for a different wrinkle? :wow:

Again, I think it's a case where people use terminology in totally different ways, and where musicians could easily find themselves talking at odds with each other.

I'm fairly sure that in the Real Books a horizontal line is used for bass notes. Our friend from the Finale forum could give some spectacularly Cage-ian performances of the standards.